Linux-Advocacy Digest #272, Volume #34 Sun, 6 May 01 21:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Yet another IIS security bug ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) ("Ayende
Rahien")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Nomen Nescio)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (Clark Safford)
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT (Glenn Davies)
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux (k@k)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux (pip)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why is Microsoft opening more Windows source code? (jtnews)
Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons ("mmnnoo")
Re: Linux Advocacy ("mmnnoo")
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux (Richard Thrippleton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 01:50:39 +0100
>> So DHCP won't start automatically on your Linux box then!
>
> Correct.
>
>> HUMM, could it be that your a fucking dumbass? What did you do to
>> disable it then? How'd you manage it since you don't know anything
>> about Linux? Did you accidentally blow away INIT.D from root? Did you
>> finally figure out how RPM uninstall works?
>
> Could it be that there's a bug in Linux? Or in the drivers? Not in the
> drivel you post?
Shut up and stop whinging. Just do what any one of the helpful people
have suggested and put a script in rc.local. If you couldn't be arsed to
either do that or fix the bug, then you shouldn't be arsed to post
either.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Yet another IIS security bug
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 01:57:10 +0100
> (from what I've heard, a Mac would reduce me to a gibbering wreck).
Not if you install Linux on it :-)
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 02:55:11 +0200
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9d38m6$r3r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Probably wouldn't be hard to put a coffee maker on, but that may
violate
> > > some gpl on the howto for getting linux to make coffee.
> >
> > That is one thing that frighten me about the GPL.
> > There is already GPLed data, what happen when other things start to get
GPL?
>
> I don't see why you're frightened.
> You develop something, you want to make money out of it, you copyright
> your work, then sell licenses or whatever, and nobody else is allowed to
> make money out of it.
> I develop something, I don't want to make money out of it (maybe because
> I'm making money selling hardware), but I want to share my work with
> other developers in order to make it better and useful for a lot of
> people, me included, so I GPL my work, and nobody else is allowed to
> make money out of it.
> In both case we're speaking of protected IP. Nobody else is allowed to
> make money out of it except the rightful owner.
> Except that in case of GPL everybody else is entitled to use it and to
> make money from its usage (e.g. I can use a GPL Apache to sell IP
> service).
> So what's wrong with GPL?
The GPL is viral & unremovable.
When you start to GPL data, you can start GPL other things.
What about GPLing a network protocol? Since every program that uses it is a
derivative, every such program must be GPL.
GPLing is not nice, spesifically because it all-encompasing natute. I don't
have a problem with forcing people to open the changes they made to your
code, that is logical. But I've big problems with forcing them to GPL
*their* code.
Consider this scenrio, MS release WindowsGPL, where the license has once
exception "A program need not to be GPLed if it used just enough of the
system's resources to query whatever this is WinGPL or normal Win, and then
display a message saying this program cannot be run on WinGPL"* ?
Essencially meaning that everything you run on WinGPL must GPLed, too. Now,
they also have normal Windows, which doesn't have this provision.
How much software would run on WinGPL and how much on normal Windows? (I'm
talking about the *exact* same base code, the only difference is that the
reutnr value of bool isWindowsGol(); )
(Linux gets away with it with a license exception that says that you don't
have to GPL your program for normal system calls)
GPL limit the scope that the code can be reused.
At the moment, I can avoid developing GPL, but what happen if people start
GPLing all sort of stuff, beside code.
*Translation from layer speak in capital letters.
The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom.
--Supreme Court Justice William Orville Douglas
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product)
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 03:01:10 +0200
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:M4lJ6.8393$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > A> I don't like string handling in C any better than the next guy.
> > B> Even if I would write it, it wouldn't be GPL.
>
> C> command.com sucks. cmd.exe is much better.
Agreed!
> (not to mention that Bash isn't really superior to cmd.exe except in
> scripting, but then, WSH seems better at that)
WSH is just one step below programming, if at all.
But people call what perl does scripting.
Oh, well.
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:06:28 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 06 May 2001 14:15:57 GMT, Charles Lyttle
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Linux was/is and will continue to be a miserable failure as a consumer
> >> desktop OS until it wakes up and starts offering an end result that is
> >> superior instead of an inferior result based upon theoretical superior
> >> technologies.
> >>
> >> Consumers want instant gratification and Linux is way out in left
> >> field as far as that is concerned. A consumer can call a 1-800 number
> >> they saw on TV and order the latest and greatest Pentium 4 system with
> >> all of the bells and whistles including AOL or MSN for less than 2k.
> >> They open the box plug it in and it works. Sure the scanner/printer
> >> and modem are Win* variety, but who cares? It works. They have a
> >> pre-load with all kinds of games, office suites and so forth. The same
> >> Office suites that their children are using in school. My daughter
> >> needed to a Power point presentation for French class the other day
> >> (she is 15 and in 9th grade). Am I going to give her a Linux version?
> >> Hell no!!! I want the CD I burn to run on Windows because that is what
> >> her teacher uses. Why be a martyr?
> >>
> >
> >You are absolutely correct. Linux turns consumers into producers and
> >encourages them to think for themselves. Why expose your daughter to the
> >hazards of thought? That will only maker her unhappy and she might vote
> >to cut of your social security. Exposing your children to Linux is child
> >abuse! She might fail and damage her self-esteem. Instead of Linux run
> >right out and buy her a sack of McDonald's and some Guess jeans.
>
> The Lesson in this case is French, not learning how to use a computer.
>
Don't be fooled. I have seen 15 year old Canadian and French citizens
working with Linux in French. Some misguided parents think that just
because the subject isn't computer science, that it is ok to let the
student choose the best tools for the job. That isn't so. They will
notice how easy it is to produce camera ready French papers using LaTex,
and then get the idea that they might be able to produce literature
instead of buying at Barns and Nobel. I made that mistake with my
fiance. One day the university computer lab was down with all its
Windows computers and MS Word. So I helped her do a graduate history
report using LaTex. After that she went wild writing papers using LaTex
and submitting them for publication. She started to think she could do
something without depending on me or the school. You never want your
children or spouse to get that idea. Think of what would happen if your
daughter found out that there was a French version of Linux available
with real French spell checkers and editors. She might start
corresponding with real French students in real French and reading real
French literature. That would make some of the other students feel bad
because they couldn't keep up with her. She would get bad marks on
"socialization" and the teacher would get in trouble for permitting the
self-esteam of some students to be damaged. If she happened to mutter
something in French slang, she would be locked up for life for
"non-specific terrorist threats". If a student embarasses a teacher by
saying something the teacher doesn't understand, it is a "non-specific
terrorist threat".
> My 11 yo son uses Linux and likes it.
By all means put a stop to that deviant behavior NOW. Don't you know
that "male, using Linux" fits the profile of potential perpertrator of
potential school violence? Local proceuitors have taken to charging such
as adults for making "non-specific potentially terroist threats".
>
> Flatfish
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons
Date: 7 May 2001 12:09:11 +1200
>Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>[snipped]
>
>Daring ideas do not always succeed.
>
>Lotus has always been mismanaged.
And the marketing department out on a permanent lunch break. Lotus should
focus on what it is good at, they should be porting Notes to as many platforms
as possible, competively price Domino Server, port Smart Suite to Linux and
Mac to gain a larger market share. And on top of that, they should be agressive
sellers, grabbing customers by the balls, and saying, "what ever Microsoft
has offered you, we will beat it" mentality.
>Corel has always made crap.
Corel has great products, but is not an agressive seller. The NZ Army were
tendering out contracts, Corel could have come in, all guns blazing, and
said that they would beat ANY offer on the table. The problem is that they
stood back with their finger up their ass expecting that their customers
will come to them. Sorry Corel, thats not how the world works.
>The NetWinder was a cool idea, but a hard sell.
The netwinder was a shit idea, Corel lost focus on its core function of business,
and that is being a software company. If their were a Microsoft, sure, go
out on a tangent, try new things, however, Corel is a small compared to the
like of Oracle, IBM etc. they should never have taken such as suicidal risk.
However, with that being said, had they used a Intel based CPU, more people
would have bought it, however, since it used some obscure Strong ARM processor,
that has bugger all support by software companies, it was doomed to fail.
>The list goes on.
>
>The hit/miss ratio of new ideas is at least 100 to 1. A market driven >company
will only produce improvements on existing successful
>products. A truly innovative company will hit or miss based on luck >and
need with new products.
>
>This is what venture capital is all about, "upside potential" >and "downside
>risk." A company will see a predictable return on an improvement. X + >Y
sales of the new product. X being the number of old users who will >upgrade
and Y is the normalized number of new users the company >normally gets.
>if (X + Y) * net is lower than the cost of developing the new version, >they
don't do one.
Marketing + great idea = bloody nice booty
The problem is that every good idea, such as BeOS, were never marketed properly,
the company was more worried about its ego than anything else, and whats
worse, had Be paid software and hardware companies off, to get them to port
their drivers and software to beos, with some of the millions they used to
stay in business, the might of actually gained a share in the graphics market.
>
>Innovation is quite different. It has a huge upside potential. The >downside
risk is that it wipes out the investment. High risk, >potentially high return.
>
>Neither is the perfect "win all the time strategy" but, innovation is >what
keeps people employed and the economy moving.
E-Commerce has failed because the likes of Amazon either don't ship software
and elecronics overseas, which they legally can because New Zealand allows
parallel importing, thus bypassing distributors, or when they do ship, such
as a CD, the cost of the CD is $10 and the cost of P&P is $35, that is $NZ100
for a cd I can purchase at a local music store for $NZ30. See the logic,
it doesn't make sense. Also, the number of times E-Commerce companies fail
to deliver on time, the fact that they donot include a free phone 0800 number
for customers overseas gets me more pissed off. If they expect people would
rather purchase on line, which costs more + the problems I faced, they have
a nother thing coming, and thats called a Chapter 11.
>
>By and large, most CEOs are worthless, I agree with you there, but the
>simplistic enumeration of various corporate failures does not do the >real
problem justice.
There is no leadership, no vision. Telecom New Zealand, they should laid
out a 10 year plan, had they done that in 1990, with the emergience of the
Internet, upgraded the telecommunications network to handle data/voice/video,
right now they would be making a hell of alot more money. Unforunately,
we are now here, and they are frantically trying to upgrade the networks
to handle the extra capacity.
>
>In the case of Lotus, they failed to get a Windows product to market >soon
enough. They had a feud with Microsoft and Microsoft won because >Lotus didn't
show up. Had Lotus introduced a good Windows version of >123, earlier rather
than later, maybe today MS Office would not be as >big as it is today.
On top of that, Lotus 123 was 16 bit right up until the release of Smart
Suite ME.
>
>Word Perfect has almost the same story.
Mind you, Wordperfect had so may owners, it never actually got properly established.
>
>The story of Corel isn't about Corel, it is about Micrographics who >make
IMHO always made a better product.
I've used Corel products since they released Corel Draw 5, and every release,
these products have been getting better, Corel Draw 10, includes web-base
multi-media support, Wordperfect Suite 2000 Pro has better graphics and font
support than Office 2000. The problem is, yet again, they fail to market,
they fail to indoctrinate the public about Corel and what it does. On large
contracts they fail to take Microsoft head on, by saying, "what ever Microsoft
is offering, we will beat it". They stand back and expect the whole world
to revolve around them, well, that has been their downfall.
Matthew Gardiner
http://www.zfree.co.nz
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 02:10:13 +0200 (CEST)
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> The intolerance of homosexuals is a much higher level thing and can
> >> easily be changed.
> >
> > how's that working out for you?
>
> Well, I haven't tried to make many people more tolerant, because the
> people I am friends with have enough of a moral sense to realise that
> blind prejudice is wrong. As for the bigots I've tried to convert here?
> well, they're still bigots. What more can I say.
so your claim that intolerance towards homosexuality can easily be changed
is just an article of faith?
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Clark Safford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 20:09:55 -0600
Jasper wrote:
> And for goodness sake can any Linux advocate say with a straight face
> they can easily connect their Linux box to an ISP?
Easily? Well, after begging bellsouth to forget the cute little cd and just set
me up an account, give me the ip's of a couple of dns servers, a mail server and
a news server, I was able to get on-line in about 5 minutes. I'm no linux
expert, so I took the path of least resistance (not MS in this case but kppp).
The hardest part was convincing bellsouth to set up the account.
> What about the lack of databasing with configuration files under
> Linux? /etc/passwd is a joke. The CPU cycles require to parse all of
> these free formatted text files must be enormous. Is there a plan to
> address this issue?
Why do people always migrate toward complexity? 50 or so ascii config files
will always be far more reliable than a single registry (i.e. single point of
failure) if for no other reason than people usually pay attention when making
changes to them. Also, applications can always convert ascii config files
if/when performance warrants it. Does the world really need another editor?
Can't we all muck up a computer just as easily with vi?
> you can only talk about uptimes for so long.
It is kind of boring, but I'll never forget the shock I felt when a HP-UX server
died on me. That was a feeling I never experienced w/ MS.
------------------------------
From: Glenn Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 17:23:35 -0700
On Sun, 6 May 2001 04:14:01 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 5 May 2001 13:52:28 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>
>> > CORBA came after COM. COM originated at MS in 1987, but wasn't
>> > actually put into a product until OLE 1, which MS released in April of
>> > 1992 in the form of Windows 3.1.
>>
>> OLE 1 was an ugly hack on top of DDE and had very little in common with
>> DDE as we know it today.
>
>Correct, I meant OLE 2. OLE 1 shipped with Windows 3.0, OLE 2 shipped with
>Windows 3.1.
>
>
I don't think this is correct. According to Brockschmidt's Inside Ole
pg. 10, OLE 1 shipped in 1991. This would put it in with the release
of Windows 3.1 as Windows 3.0 was relased in 1990.
This web site has a different time frame then Erik's.
http://www.iseran.com/Win32/FAQ/history.html
----
Glenn Davies
------------------------------
From: k@k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: 6 May 2001 16:47:01 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> On many occasions, I have wasted much bandwidth and time
>obtaining sourcecode to some killer app, only to find that it will only
>compile on x86.
I do not have any such problems, but again, I only work with
Java applications.
I have no idea why anyone would use something other than Java for
applicatons (unless we are talking about low level system utilites here).
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 02:33:34 +0100
> You need to take extra steps to setup GS as an interupter for the
> printer. Of course, you can just run printtool to do it for you. Now,
Extra steps compared to what? I selected a printer when I installed Linux.
> I've never used GS to print, I use it to view mathematical
> documentations. But according to Denial, GS isn't a good way to use a
> printer. Got any info about it?
GS Is fine to drive printers. ctually it works very well for postscript.
It is a bit sucky for PDF interpretation, but Acrobat for Linux can be
run as a filter. That coupled with GS is very good.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 01:37:18 +0100
"k@k" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > On many occasions, I have wasted much bandwidth and time
> >obtaining sourcecode to some killer app, only to find that it will only
> >compile on x86.
>
> I do not have any such problems, but again, I only work with
> Java applications.
>
> I have no idea why anyone would use something other than Java for
> applicatons (unless we are talking about low level system utilites here).
Java can't do many things that you may want to do (at least without
polluting your code with jni calls). Also the overhead of a JVM may be
too much for certain utilities (there is always the possibility of
native compilation of course). Also, Java performance for Linux based
systems lags behind that of windows based systems. Also developers know
and love C or C++ and their native toolkits. Each to their own - but as
a Java Programmer I a biased towards it's ideals.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 02:37:20 +0100
> There are problems with LGPL code using properity code, but on general,
> I agree.
>
> David: LGPL says: "I gives you this code, and whatever you do with this
> code, you'll have to show me." GPL says: "I gives you this code, and
> whatever you do with this code, as well as any *other* code you use, you
> must show me."
No the GPL says, if you use my code, you must show me exactly what you do
with it. That "exactly" includes the whole program that you're using it
in. The LGPL says, if you link to my code, then you're not a derived work.
> As was mentioned FSF seem to ignore Sun's violations of a the GPL. But
> in theory, Sun shouldn't be able to ship *any* GPL software with
> Solaris, unless it GPL the whole thing. LGPL, I think, have the same
> problem, I'm not so sure about it.
No, that's not true. Sun is quite free to ship GCC and GAWK and whatever
with solaris. Shipping them in no way makes the kernel a derived work,
and hence it doesn't fall under the GPL.
-ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why is Microsoft opening more Windows source code?
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:31:54 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Well, they're not the same really, and I understand that Stallman wants to
> differentiate them. My beef is the use of the term "free", and it always
> has been. They could have chosen lots of different terms, but then that
> would be unambiguous, and would be a detriment to the GPL being snuck in the
> back door of companies without their knowledge until it was too late.
Stallman talks about the use of the term
free and why another alternative has not
been selected in the speech at
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/audio/audio.html#ArsDigita2001
He also talks at great length about the philosophy
of Free Software in case anyone is interested
in hearing the unfiltered version.
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:45:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Matthew Gardiner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My theory is based on the number of business that are in the shit
> because they stuffed around.
>
> Corel, a company that wasted money trying to create a Java version of
> Wordperfect Office 2000, then they went off on another tangent, and
> tried to create a computer called the Netwinder based around Linux and
> the strong arm processor, two abismal failures, and look at where they
> are.
But it's just as easy to criticize a company for sitting on their laurels
and for being afraid to create new markets. Both of those projects sound
pretty neat. They just didn't fly.
> Had they focused on their core business and addressed the demands
> of customers who use Office 2000, that is, what features they demand,
> that are available in Office 2000 that aren't in Wordperfect, and when
> these issues are addressed, market the bloody software, and don't just
> sit back and wait for the customers to come to you, goto to the
> customer, grab the the customer by the balls, and say, "what ever
> Microsoft has offered you, we will beat it!", thats how you get the
> customers!
>
I think this is your central premise, and I take issue with it. To take
on Microsoft's flagship product head to head is to attack where they're
strongest. It's foolhardy. The fact is that MS is totally committed to
protecting Office and has truckloads of money to do it. If MS decides to
undercut the price of your product with their own, they can easily afford
to lose money as long as necessary until you are wiped out. Besides, they
control the operating system. They know what the OS will offer 3 years
from now, and add new features to it to work well with Office. Beyond
all that, they offer the safety of siding with the majority - they are
not going out of business anytime soon. That game is over. MS won.
It's time to play by a different set of rules.
> Lotus, another example, their flag ship product, Lotus Smart Suite, they
> picked their ass's for 7 years, then finally realise that maybe it
> would be a good idea to port Lotus 123 from 16 bit to 32 bit!
I thought Lotus 123 was their flagship product. They're so long gone
that they have at best no advantage over a new startup.
>
> Be Inc, chewed through millions, yet, I see no results, AT ALL! Had
> they, right from day one started to pay off hardware and software
> companies to port their apps to their platform, then maybe the OS would
> not be gradually dying like it is now.
>From what I've heard they had a decent product. But nobody has enough
money to buy off the whole industry. Again, another company whose
product may be somewhat better but which is basically playing against MS
by the old rules and cannot win.
>
> SGI, a niche market company, it has an office in New Zealand that would
> be lucky to make 1 to 2 sales a year! it would be cheaper to fly a
> sales rep out their maintain a local presence instead of having 4
> people employed in NZ. There hardware is made in woggs somewhere, and
> there is a darth of decent graphic, audio, video applications. Yet,
> instead of addressing the issue, they sit back and blame everyone else
> for their wowes.
>
> Need I go on?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
All of the companies you name are has-beens. They're one-product
companies. Corel had Corel-Draw, which gave them enough money at some
point to buy out Wordperfect (another one-product company). Lotus had
the 1-2-3 cash-cow LONG ago, and SGI's products filled a niche when
everyone else thought a 16-color display was cool. But those past
successes in no way translate to the future. Now they're just three of
the thousands of companies trying to find and fill some niche.
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Advocacy
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:48:07 GMT
Where were you? We'd given you up for dead.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Thrippleton)
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 01:52:57 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Hauck wrote:
>On Sun, 6 May 2001 21:55:05 +0000, Richard Thrippleton
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> First, let's get one thing straight; I'm not a wintroll.
>
>Given that your rant is about a problem that is even worse with Windows,
>I'll have to believe you.
>
>
>> What pisses me off about quite a significant amount of Linux software
>> is the ridiculous x86 bias, ridiculous to the point of ignorance of
>> the existance of other CPUs.
>
>Why not name names?
I believe Quakeforge _used_ to be a problem in this area, but have
since cleaned up their act. D1X (Descent), and Crimson Fields, though
the latter was just an endianism problem. Sound playback in many
applications suffers from endianism as well.Also some DivX players, though the
Avifile library used in conjunction with some gave fair warning (using WINE
for video playback? Disgusting!). The attitude at http://www.download.com is
pretty awful; lots of 'Linux' binaries for offer, without mentioning that
they're binaries or x86 only. I have bitched about this to them before,
suggesting better categorisation.
>The PowerPC swings both ways. Shall we assume that LinuxPPC is
>big-endian?
Big Endian, yes, though I wasn't aware that PPC could do small.
Richard
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
